Free Status Report - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01049-EWN-KLM

Document 199

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-cv-01049-EWN-PAC MITCHELL THEOPHILUS GARRAWAY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EX REL., et al., Defendants. ______________________________________________________________________________ PLAINTIFF'S STATUS REPORT, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY DEADLINE, AND REQUEST TO RESET PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff, Mitchell Theophilus Garraway, by his attorney, John D. Phillips of Shughart Thomson & Kilroy, P.C., hereby files his Status Report, Unopposed Motion for Extension of Discovery Deadline, and Request to Reset Pretrial Conference, and in support thereof, respectfully represents as follows: Certificate of Compliance The undersigned certifies that, in compliance with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1(a), he has conferred with counsel for Defendants and that the Defendants do not object to the relief requested herein.. 1. In its February 15, 2007 Minute Order, the Court ordered that "discovery shall be

accomplished within the next sixty days," and set the Final Pretrial Conference for May 11, 2007.

2051671.1

Case 1:04-cv-01049-EWN-KLM

Document 199

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 2 of 4

2.

On February 23, 2007, Plaintiff served, by facsimile to Defendants' counsel, his

"First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents." Also, by letter dated February 23, 2007 to Defendants' counsel, Plaintiff informally requested to take several depositions. 3. On or about March 26, 2007, Plaintiff was served with an unsigned copy of

"Defendants' Response to Plaintiff's Discovery Requests." Thereafter, Defendants produced approximately 1500 pages of documents responsive to Plaintiff's Discovery Requests in two different batches in late March and early April 2007. One problem causing delay is that the documents are Bureau of Prison documents and involve other counsel. 4. On March 28 and April 12, 2007, the undersigned engaged in "meet and confer"

conferences with counsel for the Government. During these conferences, counsel discussed the production of additional documents, the taking of depositions of Defendants and third parties, and stipulations with respect to authenticity of documents. Plaintiff's understanding of the agreements reached at this conference is as follows: (a) (b) Defendants will revise certain of their responses to the discovery requests; Defendants will furnish a copy of their revised discovery responses signed

by each of the Defendants (one of whom is recovering from medical problems) as soon as possible; (c) Defendants will cooperate with Plaintiff in correlating the documents

produced with the numbered requests; (d) documents; Defendants will stipulate to the authenticity of Bureau of Prisons

2051671.1

2

Case 1:04-cv-01049-EWN-KLM

Document 199

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 3 of 4

(e)

Defendants will cooperate in producing a Rule 30(b)(6) deponent on

behalf of the Bureau of Prisons and will accept service of the subpoena with respect to this deposition and also with respect to the Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of the Bureau of Prisons Office of Internal Affairs; and (f) Defendants will cooperate in the scheduling of depositions, and the

production of deponents, for depositions in Florence, Colorado, on May 23 and May 24, 2007, including an inspection of the prison premises where the incident which is the subject of this lawsuit occurred and if necessary in the arrangements for telephonic depositions of prison personnel who are no longer located in Florence, Colorado. 6. Under the circumstances, 60 days was an overly ambitious and unrealistic time

period within which to initiate and to complete discovery, notwithstanding the continuing efforts of counsel to cooperate with respect to discovery matters. Counsel agree that an additional 90 days is needed to complete discovery. 7. Moreover, as a practical matter, a meaningful conference resulting in a Final

Pretrial Order will be difficult to accomplish without first completing depositions. 8. On the positive side, Plaintiff Garraway remains in Englewood at the Denver

Correctional Facility, and with the cooperation of prison officials is readily available to his counsel. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court extend the discovery deadline to July 15, 2007, and reset the date of the Final Pretrial Conference.

2051671.1

3

Case 1:04-cv-01049-EWN-KLM

Document 199

Filed 04/16/2007

Page 4 of 4

Dated: April 16, 2007. SHUGHART THOMSON & KILROY, P.C. /s/ John D. Phillips John D. Phillips Michael D. Murphy 1050 17th Street, Suite 2300 Denver, CO 80265 (303) 572-9300 Attorneys for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on April 16, 2007, a true and correct copy of the foregoing PLAINTIFF'S STATUS REPORT, UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY DEADLINE, AND REQUEST TO RESET PRETRIAL CONFERENCE was served via ECF on the following: Mark S. Pestal, Esq. Office of the United States Attorney 1225 Seventeenth Street, #700 Denver, CO 80202 /s/ Mary Watters

2051671.1

4